22 - Laserfiche WebLink

AB 2052 Assembly Bill-Bill Analysis Page 3 of 6 2. Staff Comments: In extending existing workers' compensation presumptions to all peace officers, AB 2052 raises several important questions. These are discussed below. Are All Peace Officers Exposed to Similar Occupational Hazards? Hearing Date: June 25, 2014 AB 2052 Consultant: Gideon L. Baum Page 3 Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations Historically, in crafting the current presumptions, sharp distinctions have been made between California's peace officers. As was noted above, the cancer presumption, which was last amended in 2011, included firefighters, sheriffs, police officers, California Highway Patrol officers, and arson investigation units, excluding peace officers covered by other presumptions, such as University of California (UC) peace officers. Similarly, UC peace officers fall under the heart disease, hernia and pneumonia presumption, but only after serving 5 years. These distinctions may denote differences in exposure to occupational hazards, as it is likely that a bailiff of a court will be exposed to different occupational hazards than a firefighter. However, we simply do not know, as we lack any data on the occupational hazards facing the peace officers who would fall under the workers' compensation presumptions under AB 2052. Unlike AB 1035 (Perez), which the Committee heard earlier this year and was based on a study which identified specific costs and population numbers, there are no studies which could suggest the expected impacts of AB 2052. Noting the recent decisions of prior Legislatures to make distinctions between peace officers, as well as the lack of data to support backing away from those prior distinctions, the Committee may wish to consider if additional research is necessary to fully understand the impacts of AB 2052. Legal Questions on the Impacts of AB 2052: Currently, the workers' compensation presumptions are extended to classes of peace officers whose status is not situational - police officers and sheriffs are always peace officers by the nature of their position. Other classes of peace officers, such as Municipal Utility District security guards and welfare fraud investigators, are peace officers in specific situations. It is unclear how this would impact current workers' compensation presumptions. Would, for example, a Municipal Utility District security guard who arrested an individual and then suffered a heart attack six months later be eligible for the presumption? Additionally, AB 2052 extends presumptions within California's Hearing Date: June 25, 2014 AB 2052 Consultant: Gideon L. Baum Page 4 Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/asm/ab_2051-2100/ab_2052_cfa_20140624_092044_sen_comm.htm I 7/3/2014